Re: Proposed Aim for Speak Freely

The use of the program is free, and I merely pointed it out here so that people 
could hear the difference in sound at higher speed as it has been a discussion 
on the list as one of the possible additions to sf.

Frank.


Text of your message written on 18 Aug 2003, 
 reads thus: Re: [speak-freely] Proposed Aim for

Frank,

Perhaps I missed something on the web page you mentioned, but Ventrilo
appears to be a copyrighted commercial product. How does it pertain to SF
that is open-source and free? Ventrilo is not likely to be giving away
source code for free anytime soon. :-)

Kevin


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Frank Ibarra" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 13:41
Subject: Re: [speak-freely] Proposed Aim for Speak Freely


> If you want to get an idea of the advantages, and of the short comings of
high
> speed audio, try
> http://www.ventrilo.com
> As close to fm quality as I have heard.
> But there is good and bad.
> Before I go into it, I think I will let you play with it for more
feedback.
> It is free anyhow.
>
> Frank.
>
>
> Text of your message written on 18 Aug 2003,
>  reads thus: Re: [speak-freely] Proposed Aim for Speak Freely
>
> I concur. I do not need high quality audio, since all my traffic is
> telephone quality (or less) radio communications.  I use SF to link
various
> radio repeater sites together and do not want or need additional codecs.
> Some of my sites have *very* limited network bandwidth, with some running
> as
> slow as 9600 bps.  That 9600 bps is shared with other non-VOIP traffic no
> less!
>
> I think that SF programming effort should emphasize a solution of the NAT
> problem, possibly using a single port for both control and VOIP packets,
> code cleanup, turning it into a GUI-less DLL, Etc.
>
> After all the important stuff is done, then add all the codecs you like -
> but make sure you #ifdef them in the code so I can shut them all off :-)
If
> you guys can come up with codecs that use LESS bandwidth than the ones
> already included in SF with decent audio quality, then go for it.
>
> Lets focus on the original intended use of SF before reinventing
RealAudio,
> Windoze Media Player, Etc.
>
> Kevin
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "P Heyden" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 07:14
> Subject: Re: [speak-freely] Proposed Aim for Speak Freely
>
>
> > Gentlemen,
> >
> > I have followed this thread of what ought and what ought not be done
with
> SF
> > and I only ask that the collective "we" not forget what many of us use
SF
> > for.  Namely, "plain old internet telephone".
> >
> > It is nice to talk about high quality codecs etc, but I can tel you that
> for
> > normal telecommunications 64K is not needed.  For many years I ran very
> good
> > quality PCM multiplexed voice circuits at 16K.  Our customers could not
> tell
> > the difference between 16k and 64K.
> >
> > What is needed is a definitive plan for the future of SF.  As in many
> things
> > you have to walk before you run.  I see the maintenance and support of
the
> > current product as a basic cornerstone for what the future might hold.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Paul vander Heyden
>
>
>
>                       * * *
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send E-mail containing
> the word "unsubscribe" in the message body (*not* as the
> Subject) to [email protected]
> Subject) to [email protected]
>
>
>                       * * *
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send E-mail containing
> the word "unsubscribe" in the message body (*not* as the
> Subject) to [email protected]



                      * * *

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send E-mail containing
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body (*not* as the
Subject) to [email protected]


                      * * *

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send E-mail containing
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body (*not* as the
Subject) to [email protected]